“Punting the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Punting the Pundits”.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
Paul Krugman: Class Wars of 2012
On Election Day, The Boston Globe reported, Logan International Airport in Boston was running short of parking spaces. Not for cars – for private jets. Big donors were flooding into the city to attend Mitt Romney’s victory party.
They were, it turned out, misinformed about political reality. But the disappointed plutocrats weren’t wrong about who was on their side. This was very much an election pitting the interests of the very rich against those of the middle class and the poor. [..]
The important thing to understand now is that while the election is over, the class war isn’t. The same people who bet big on Mr. Romney, and lost, are now trying to win by stealth – in the name of fiscal responsibility – the ground they failed to gain in an open election.
Daphne Eviatar: Ending Indefinite Detention of Americans Who Aren’t Being Detained Doesn’t Solve the Problem
Last year, Congress, through the National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes funding for the military, expanded the category of terror suspects that could be held indefinitely by the military without charge or trial. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and others who supported the provision argued America is now the battlefield, so suspects picked up here should also be imprisoned indefinitely. This year, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) wants to require Guantanamo custody for all terror suspects. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) would force the Pentagon to plan yet another offshore prison facility for them.
There are, as always, some well-meaning lawmakers who want to restore certain basic rights and values. But the one effort gaining steam in the Senate right now — the Due Process Guarantee Act, sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) — would actually do nothing to solve the problem.
What’s the best way to pressure Republicans into agreeing to extend the Bush tax cuts for the middle class while ending them for the wealthy?
The president evidently believes it’s to scare average Americans about how much additional taxes they’ll pay if the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule at the end of the year. He plans to barnstorm around the country, sounding the alarm. [..]
So rather than stoking middle-class fears about the cliff, the White House ought to be doing the opposite — reassuring most Americans they can survive the fall. To utilize his trump card effectively, Obama needs to convince Republicans that the middle class is willing to jump.
Richard (RJ) Eskow: If Fighting for the Majority Is ‘Radical,’ Call Me Radical
An extremist Web site called WorldNetDaily says that the Campaign For America’s Future, where I am a Senior Fellow, is “radical.” They’re worked up about our Wage Class War Web site, which documents 2012’s successful class-based political campaigns and promotes this winning strategy in future elections.
In the hallucinogenic haze that is today’s far right, apparently it’s “radical” to promote ideas and policies supported by most American voters — including, in many cases, most Republicans.
Agreeing with Republican voters isn’t really radical, of course. So who, exactly, thinks “Wage Class War” is unreasonable?
E. J. Dionne: Ignore Grover (and Learn From Him)
Here’s the first lesson from the early skirmishing over ways to avoid the fiscal cliff: Democrats and liberals have to stop elevating Grover Norquist, the anti-government crusader who wields his no-tax pledge as a nuclear weapon, into the role of a political Superman.
Pretending that Norquist is more powerful than he is allows Republicans to win acclaim they haven’t earned yet. Without making a single substantive concession, they get loads of praise just for saying they are willing to ignore those old pledges to Grover. You can give him props as a PR genius. Like Ke$ha or Beyonce, he is widely known here by only one name. But kudos for an openness to compromise should be reserved for Republicans who put forward concrete proposals to raise taxes.
The corollary is that progressives should be unafraid to draw their own red lines. If you doubt this is a good idea, just look at how effective Norquist has been. Outside pressure from both sides is essential for a balanced deal.
Joe Baker: Don’t Cut Medicare Benefits — Tackle Drug Prices
As the approach of the so-called “Fiscal Cliff” nears, many advocates nationwide are making this message clear: Medicare benefit cuts are not an option. In a letter to the president and Congress, AARP states, “As we move forward, it is clear that older Americans want the focus of the debate to be on reducing overall health costs and not simply targeting Medicare and Medicaid for budget cuts.” Just days after the election, a collective of the largest and most powerful progressive voices ran a Washington Post advertisement to the president and Congress that included, “No cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security benefits or shifting costs to beneficiaries or the states,” as one of five guiding principles for reducing the federal deficit. Medicare Rights Center joined 146 national organizations in support of this very same message. [..]
The federal government already negotiates with pharmaceutical companies for drug rebates in the Medicaid program. Up until the creation of Medicare Part D — Medicare prescription drug coverage offered by private plans — these Medicaid rebates applied to those dually eligible for the Medicare and Medicaid program. A 2011 report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that the cost of the top 100 drugs for dually eligible beneficiaries was 30 percent higher under Medicare than it would have been were Medicaid rebates still applicable.
Recent Comments